Unicorns and Bloodlust 2
At Talking Points Memo, Brendan Gilfillan tries to understand the Republican Party’s fascination with war as the first and only solution for every dispute. A snippet:
(snip)
The uncomfortable (and unpopular) subtext of many opponents’ public statements is clear: Despite the immense amount of blood and treasure spent in Iraq, some have still not learned the lesson that wars in the Middle East fought in the name of nuclear non-proliferation are best avoided ifs there is a better option.
Frankly, I think the reason is simple, but not at all pretty or even sane. It’s the same reason someone might have for shooting a horse grazing peacefully in a pasture: the lust for carnage, especially vicarious carnage from a safe distance, war as a spectator sport.
July 21, 2015 at 1:22 pm
“Ever since the country was declared part of the Axis of Evil, the bottom line for a vocal minority of folks has been that Iran is simply too evil to deal with. And to be sure, these opponents have a solid point; Iran’s behavior at home and abroad is the primary obstacle to its inclusion in the international [etc]”
What crap. One understands the overall argument and the pointing out of the obvious on the right and in the Senate. However, conceding the Iran might be evil but we got it covered, anyway, is an atrocious position to take in light of how the last decade’s gone down.
“and forces their scientists to forget everything they know about the periodic table of elements?”
And this is a terrible construction. No one talks like that if they understand even a few shreds about the origins of the atomic bomb. IIn fact, I’ve never heard anyone couch it this way.
July 21, 2015 at 2:44 pm
Terrible construction, but great hyperbole.